Official Discussion Thread for "Developer Deep Dive – Let’s Talk About Class Identity in ESO"

eso_lytw8

I think the biggest concern I have is how the current dev team is making decisions. It should be pretty simple, you want to make a game that is fun to play. So this should drive your decision making. I realize it is hard when you have a game with so many different facets but in the end if your game is fun people will play it.

So let's come back to the nightblades relentless focus. In U23 the designers decide that removing the offensive buffs from the skill will make the game more fun...because that's our goal. How is this going to make the game more fun, not sure but we have to believe there is a reason. Now the player base explains using a GCD and using stamina and seeing no immediate benefit is not fun, it feels bad. Why we had to explain this I am not sure, but we did. So the devs respond with "we hear you" and guess what we will give you a defensive buff that still does nothing immediately on activation. Adding a defensive buff might actually play well but it does not help the identity of the nightblade at all. It's call "assassinate" skill line for a reason.

Now we move into U24 where the next thing that happens is a nerf to the defensive buff that still doesn't immediately do anything on activation. Again one must assume this is somehow supposed to make the game more fun.

Now if that's not enough now in U25 to improve identity we give Sorcs the same play mechanic as nightblades, but they will have 2 offensive buffs for just slotting the skills, no need to even activate it. What's really interesting is that sorc's have offensive buffs on a skills called "Bound ARMOR" while nightblades have a defensive buff on an assassinate skill. Where is the logic in this? I played both classes so I am not advocating for power for either class, I am advocating for identity for both.

I bring all this up because I really think its not until ZOS brings in a new approach, new people, new process, whatever will this thing be fixed. Continuing to use the same tool that is not working will only get the same results.

Why would people think these types of changes will result in a game that is more fun to play? is there something I am missing?

Suddwrath

Ultimately, ESO is an MMORPG: A massively multiplayer online role playing game. It isn't just big, it isn't just online, it is also a role playing game. One of the most important decisions players make before ever making their character is "Who do I want to be, and how do I want to play?". At that time they do their research looking into class skills, the strengths and weaknesses of each class, and then deciding which one best falls in line with the playstyle/identity they chose for themselves.

If all of the classes are only becoming increasingly similar to one another, then the role playing aspect of the game is gradually diminished. The player's character no longer feels like the type of class they initially liked. Or worse, something they initially loved about the class that drew them to it in the first place was removed entirely from the class. Now that player is stuck with a character that does not play the way they initially liked and they have to "adapt" to a new playstyle or theme which may not even be enjoyable for them.

Sure, they could simply roll another character and pick a different class they would enjoy, but at this point there is absolutely no guarantee that class would remain the way it is due to the drastic combat changes.

One of the reasons players enjoy MMORPG's so much is that the genre allows them to invest in a character in a fantasy world and build this character in a way that is fun for them. If that identity is removed or given to another class(es) then that player's character could potentially no longer be fun for them or may lose the uniqueness they initially liked.

So while the balance numbers are important and certainly have their place, ultimately what is going to draw in new players and retain veterans is to have a fun game that feels good that they enjoy to play. Class identity is absolutely crucial in achieving that.

Rungar

one thing they could do is make all class skills and only class skills scale with your highest attributes whether they be stam or mag. Health ones would remain the same.

instant "identity".

VaranisArano

SaltySudd wrote: »

Ultimately, ESO is an MMORPG: A massive multiplayer online role playing game. It isn't just big, it isn't just online, it is also a role playing game. One of the most important decisions players make before ever making their character is "Who do I want to be, and how do I want to play?". At that time they do their research looking into class skills, the strengths and weaknesses of each class, and then deciding which one best falls in line with the playstyle/identity they chose for themselves.

If all of the classes are only becoming increasingly similar to one another, then the role playing aspect of the game is gradually diminished. The player's character no longer feels like the type of class they initially liked. Or worse, something they initially loved about the class that drew them to it in the first place, was removed entirely from the class. Now that player is stuck with a character that does not play the way they initially liked and they have to "adapt" to a new playstyle or theme which may not even be enjoyable for them.

Sure, they could simply roll another character and pick a different class they would enjoy, but at this point there is absolutely no guarantee that class would remain the way it is due to the drastic combat changes.

One of the reasons players enjoy MMORPG's so much is that the genre allows them to invest in a character in a fantasy world and build this character in a way that is fun for them. If that identity is removed or given to another class(es) then that player's character could potentially no longer be fun for them or may lose the uniqueness they initially liked.

So while the balance numbers are important and certainly have their place, ultimately what is going to draw in new players and retain veterans is to have a fun game that feels good that they enjoy to play. Class identity is absolutely crucial to achieve that.

Absolutely!

And to take this even further, its not enough to hold out promises that we'll get class identity changes in the future while implementing constant changes to gameplay.

Experienced players already had their visions of class identity. Those power fantasies and especially Play Patterns have been changed so much by the Devs over time that its no wonder many players grow disillusioned. And it looks to be worse!

New players starting today will end up in the same boat. If they start a StamDK now, what will StamDK look like when ZOS is done with it? Will their power fantasy and play pattern stay consistent? Or will they have to keep changing and adapt as ZOS adjusts their own vision of StamDK identity? Or any other class?

(They'll have to change and adapt to keep pace with ZOS' vision.)

This is one reason why players are so disatisfied now, and why the prospect of future updates worth of class identity changes fills us with dread. Will our vision match that of the Devs? Or will we have to have to change our power fantasies and play patterns again and again to fit what the Devs want?

Elsonso

SaltySudd wrote: »

So while the balance numbers are important and certainly have their place, ultimately what is going to draw in new players and retain veterans is to have a fun game that feels good that they enjoy to play. Class identity is absolutely crucial in achieving that.

Sadly, ZOS either did not have a firm class identity rule in place from the start, or they decided to toss it and create a new one. Multiple times. I have come to expect that ZOS is going to change the class identity whenever they feel they want to.

I still have a stamina DK on the bench from back when they decided to split DK into the cool fire breathing and the not-so-cool poison vomit.

Cadbury

lordrichter wrote: »

SaltySudd wrote: »

So while the balance numbers are important and certainly have their place, ultimately what is going to draw in new players and retain veterans is to have a fun game that feels good that they enjoy to play. Class identity is absolutely crucial in achieving that.

Sadly, ZOS either did not have a firm class identity rule in place from the start, or they decided to toss it and create a new one. Multiple times. I have come to expect that ZOS is going to change the class identity whenever they feel they want to.

I still have a stamina DK on the bench from back when they decided to split DK into the cool fire breathing and the not-so-cool poison vomit.

In ZOS's defense, it is entirely possible that this topic could be a sign that the devs have finally decided to totally invest in a design philosophy regarding class identity and are wiling to be honest and frank about it going forward. I have to give the devs props for at least addressing the "viable" vs. "optimal" debate.

In the end, we have to be willing to meet each other halfway. Or the disconnects between dev and player will only get wider.

Edit: Make no mistake. I'm not exonerating the devs completely. I'm simply giving credit where credit is due.

Araneae6537

I’m glad that class does not equal role in ESO! I like for classes to not only have different flavor but different strengths. I would expect that different class+role combos might be optimal for different content and one meta overall, so long as other variations are quite viable for most content in the hands of an experienced player.

I started this past July and like what I’ve tried so far, but not experienced enough to have an opinion on directions the game is evolving. I hope there continue to be options for both gap-closers and knockbacks — I really like using these on my nightblade archer/dw.

Raideen

I cant stand that all classes can do all roles. It completely destroys identity.

Mages are not tanks.
Tanks are not rogues.
Rogues are not Warriors.
Warriors are tanks.


I prefer it when classes cater to their strengths, not "everyone can do anything". Its simply not how anything in the universe works, even at the atomic level.

Xael

.

mateosalvaje

I really appreciated this article and it gave me hope for the future. Thank you. ☺

karthrag_inak

All this looks great, but what i want to know is how are we to be sure that this deconstruction/reconstruction of skills isn't going to be a continual thing? The points mentioned in the article that are apparently driving the current round of shakeups seem all well and good, but to me they seem to be the same motivations for how the classes were designed in the first place.

So, in other words, what's different now? Because frankly, the complete redesign of skills, like what's been going on lately, really sucks, especially after having the same setups for years on many of my 16 toons. The new setups - the new "choices" don't seem to be any more flexible or inline with the stated vision than the old setups, so obviously the current state of things isn't going to last either. I

To be honest, it seems to me like you guys (the devs) are shooting in the dark. A lot of great ideas and plans, but it doesn't seem to me that there's much insight on what is currently going on, what skills are doing what, and where improvements need to be made. Take, for example, the fact that there's currently -no- diversity in viable gear setups - basically if you're stamina you -must- use relequen to compete, for example - but this doesn't even come up in discussion. Instead i see skills redesigned completely, and then redesigned again, seemingly arbitrarily and without a grand vision, and i don't see how this current state of things is ever going to really improve.

SipofMaim

karthrag_inak wrote: »

All this looks great, but what i want to know is how are we to be sure that this deconstruction/reconstruction of skills isn't going to be a continual thing? The points mentioned in the article that are apparently driving the current round of shakeups seem all well and good, but to me they seem to be the same motivations for how the classes were designed in the first place.

So, in other words, what's different now?

What's different now is different people are in charge and cleaning up what they inherited from the previous guy. They probably wouldn't put it that bluntly, but the mess we're wading through now is from crap that started rolling downhill a couple of years ago.

Our problem is these three-months-long awkward interim phases on the way to wherever they're taking us are sucking all the fun out of combat.

Vapirko

Emma_Overload wrote: »

My favorite part of this piece is the author's correct usage of the terms "viable" and "optimal".

PvE endgame/trial snobs must be so triggered at the suggestion that optimal and viable are NOT the same thing!

Emma’s idea of balance = bring everyone down to my level. If people are better than me nerf their stuff.

VaranisArano

Vapirko wrote: »

Emma_Overload wrote: »

My favorite part of this piece is the author's correct usage of the terms "viable" and "optimal".

PvE endgame/trial snobs must be so triggered at the suggestion that optimal and viable are NOT the same thing!

Emma’s idea of balance = bring everyone down to my level. If people are better than me nerf their stuff.

Wait....you mean to tell me I don't get better by nerfing the opposition? But how else will I win at PVP/get invited to all the top trial guilds?
Aww, I liked that plan!



More seriously, I took Emma_Overload's point to mean that there are a number of snobs who treat any non-meta build as automatically not viable, even though it's perfectly adequate for the content. Those snobs can be at any level, too, not just elite groups. I've met them in dungeons, when the meta gear/class is just not necessary in order to complete the content in a more than adequate manner. In that light, its nice to see the devs acknowledging that you don't have to run the meta class in order to be viable for a given role.

runemon

OK.. I have watched alot of changes to this game.. some I felt were needed others... not so much.. (heavy bow holding removed yeahhh that one) any-who.. I mainly wanted to say a few things.. First: Why is this change coming? Is it because the pvp'ers were getting wrecked by some meta thats super difficult to counter? Or is it that you want the top 1 percent the uber elite dungeon runners and raiders to be brought low by making everyone viable to do this content.. However that being said.. Your patch notes have not yet quoted anything to deal with environmental changes to reflect upon the highly expensive and less damaging skill sets you will leave us with?

Secondly, In a game such as this as was the case with another really good game that died SWG when you give players the ability to min/max skills to tailor their style of play.. you will run into these balance issues.. if it is a PvP thing.. then perhaps instead of telling me what YOUR vision of POWER FANTASY or how YOU feel our classes should be.. why not hard cap damage in pvp.. if someone has a dot in pvp then perhaps lock it until that dot has subsided... same thing with cc.. that will change builds from dot and cc to more direct damage dealing abilities and finally have what you consider a fair and good match.. but I digress.. I do not PvP.. I do not really participate in the harder end game content.. because of the meta that you have created is unattainable to most folks.

Lastly: I love this game, I want it to succeed. From where I am standing and never before have I seen such a backlash on sweeping changes to this game.. You guys are going to make alot of folks unhappy for alot of different reasons.. This game is aging its been around awhile.. Same bugs that were there day one are still here now.. Weapon swap bug comes to mind. Im not asking you to reconsider these changes because that would be naive of me to think that such a long winded post could change the face of Nirn. I just hope that with all this back and forth.. dots are not effective.. dots are too effective.. weapons skills are good.. weapons are not good we want you to use x toolkit.. blah blah.. the back and forth is getting kinda exhausting with each major patch..

Oh and if the devs are reading this: Give us the Ansei skill line and summoned weapons (real summoned weapons.. not floating rehashes of another skill from another class)

Kalle_Demos

*Bosmer players waiting for a Developer Deep Dive...or anything at all really...on Racial Identity in ESO*



#GiveBosmerTheirStealthBack

Grimm13

So why do the skills need to be hard coded to be stamina or magicka? Why could they not be able to be both, something you select when you buy the skill?

Czekoludek

Sorry but I don't buy it. You cannot show as what is on your mind with class identity because you even don't know the direction. And we can see it clearly with U23 and U24. I'm done, believing that your combat team can do anything more then shifting meta HEAVILY every 3 months. Your lack of clear planning, poor communication and stupid decisions is what we see, this PR post doesn't change anything.
Nice words against stupid actions. You show us your lack of competence and i don't think this damage control post will convince anyone to believe in your decisions

xeNNNNN

Yeah well this was....odd.

Play the way you like, have all classes be able to forfill all roles and then you look at magicka dragonknights and you're just like "huh....why do you have damage? DKs are tanks only! I'll remove 60% of TWO of your main sources of damage, there we go".

Which is it ZoS? are classes allowed to forfill multiple roles or are Templars healers? Are DKs Tanks? Are necros pet classes? Is sorc a sorcerer? Are nightblades assasins? Are wardens Greenpeace incarnate?

I dont think you even know at this point. Even the change to engulfing, you're litterally just saying look we nerfed you into the ground mag DKs but here, have this rework to engulfing so that you can feel useful so that if someone wants the engulfing damage buff they need to bring a magDK with high spell damage! ohhh and tanks cant use that skill to buff the group anymore because reasons.

First you effectively delete DKs true source of range defense that helped against the never ending tide of draining shot spam and the various other spammable ranged damage that we can't do anything about anymore because reflective plate was the ONLY true way to push anyone at range in PvP as a magicka player. Then you buff whip and then nerf it again AND then you nerf two of our most important damage skills by 60% not 10. Not 20 BUT 60%. All because non-class DoTs screwed up things in the last patch ... wait...did I read that back right? NON CLASS SKILLS. So why in the hell are you gutting DKs so hard again?

THEN you add a pointless rework to stonefist that wasn't even nessasary. Like what on earth are you guys doing?

Faulgor

ToniWinter wrote: »

Stamsorc a perfect hybrid. Use physical weapons and reinforce them with their spells.

That's how it used to be in the very beginning. Remember the original Surge? Transferring spell power to weapon power was such a unique buff, before the minor/major system made all of that rather dull.

jwjackson5674

This is exactly why I quit this game last month after playing since beta. In my opinion, it is ridiculous to have every class be able to do every job, ie tank, dps, heals. but this come as a result of not having enough classes.

I played FFXI for close to 9 years and FFXIV for a while before ESO came out, and I loved they way their classes, or jobs as they called them, were. FFXI has 22 classes/jobs. FFXIV has 12 or 14 now I can't remember.

Instead of butchering the classes in an effort to make them all viable for all roles....just add more classes and give them all a unique identity and singular function.

FrancisCrawford

The power fantasy thing is working better on the magicka than on the stamina side, and I prefer to play magicka, so I have little criticism there.

But when it comes to playstyle, here's the thing -- you can't get unique playstyles without having "overpowered" skills or skill combinations to build them around. For example:

• Puncture is a cheap taunt that also provides essential debuffs. It's in the same skill line that his powerful, unique passives. Ergo, 1H&S defines the predominant tanking playstyle.
• Combat Prayer is a unique, powerful skill, and so restoration staffs are essential to healing. When layering of HoTs was strong in sufficiently large groups, the playstyle was even more specific for such groups.
• Long ago, when the Clannfear had a reliable taunt, it defined a unique sorcerer solo playstyle for boss fights.
• Long ago, when Critical Surge was overpowered, it defined a unique sorcerer solo playstyle for trash fights, in tandem with Impulse.
• Recently, when the pet/Daedric Prey combo was strong, it allowed an important playstyle. Now it's been nerfed, and sorcerers are looking to do other things.
• A while ago, when magblades did strong healing via average-power DPS skills, that offered a unique group playstyle. Then it was nerfed, and now magblades offer nothing unique or interesting to groups.
• Nightblades have a unique PvE stealth playstyle, using the armor sets available to everybody, based on the movement speed from Concealed Weapon (supported by Cloak).

Etc., etc., etc.

TheNightflame

ZOS_JessicaFolsom wrote: »

VaranisArano wrote: »

Now if I may be so bold as to offer a suggestion to the relevant team who posts these Official Discussion Threads?

Something that might help with views on the forums is to sticky Official Discussion Threads like this for a brief time, when you really want players to see them. Its very easy to miss announcements like this if they get buried under Recent Discussions or if players don't regularly check the Official Announcement forum. It also helps players find it as the main discussion thread once we inevitably spiral into other threads talking about different aspects of it.

As an example of what I like to see, the Official Discussion Thread for ESO's Performance Plan is currently stickied at the top of Recent Discussions. That's extrenely beneficial to me since I can easily find the article and reference it quickly for whatever I need to know or to link others to it.

Now, I realize that threads like this one aren't quite of the same ongoing nature as the Performance Plans one. That's why I'd suggest sticking the thread near the top for a couple days.

This would also be very beneficial during Events so that players who come to the forums during Events can easily find the official information and leave feedback/ask for help as needed.

Thank you for your consideration.

This is a very reasonable suggestion, Varanis, thank you. We do try to be conscientious about not having too many sticky threads, but I think what you suggested - having important ones for a short while - is doable. (Also, done. )

Jessica is the real MVP

KageNin

Yet another attempt to divert our attention from current situation. Good try maybe next time.
At this point I'm dreading Mondays patch notes.

karthrag_inak

SipofMaim wrote: »

karthrag_inak wrote: »

All this looks great, but what i want to know is how are we to be sure that this deconstruction/reconstruction of skills isn't going to be a continual thing? The points mentioned in the article that are apparently driving the current round of shakeups seem all well and good, but to me they seem to be the same motivations for how the classes were designed in the first place.

So, in other words, what's different now?

What's different now is different people are in charge and cleaning up what they inherited from the previous guy. They probably wouldn't put it that bluntly, but the mess we're wading through now is from crap that started rolling downhill a couple of years ago.

Our problem is these three-months-long awkward interim phases on the way to wherever they're taking us are sucking all the fun out of combat.

Ok, so they have new folks running the show, and their idea is to attempt re-engineering of the "broken" old system by using the live game as a playtest/laboratory. This isn't appropriate, imo.

Wayshuba

SipofMaim wrote: »

What's different now is different people are in charge and cleaning up what they inherited from the previous guy. They probably wouldn't put it that bluntly, but the mess we're wading through now is from crap that started rolling downhill a couple of years ago.

Our problem is these three-months-long awkward interim phases on the way to wherever they're taking us are sucking all the fun out of combat.

Sorry, but no. The "previous guy" did not up DoTs through the roof one patch and then nerf them by 50% while increasing their cost the next patch. That is the current team - and that issue right there is why some many people have lost faith in their team. It wasn't the previous guy to make it so stonefist has to be spammed five times to get a stun (this is the dumbest skill proposal ever).

Even one of their more well-known diplomatic class reps was at a loss for words when reviewing the patch notes asking, out loud, how if you did some kind of audit that derived targets you were shooting for that you overshoot by so much. The answer is you don't. They are swinging into the wind without any targets whatsoever - just some nebulous objective to make it so all classes can tank/DPS/heal.

While the previous guy sometimes made mistakes, the current team is all over the map in a way I have NEVER seen in an MMO. So, let's not blame the previous guy for the massive mistakes the current team is making that has so many fed up at this point. My guild rosters have NEVER dropped like they have since the U24 patch notes came out and people basically realized this team doesn't have any real "audit" with things they are shooting for and, worse, do not know how to reasonably get there with as little disruption as possible. They seem to have no issue upending the game every three months (and worse, think there is nothing wrong with doing it).

SipofMaim

Wayshuba wrote: »

SipofMaim wrote: »

What's different now is different people are in charge and cleaning up what they inherited from the previous guy. They probably wouldn't put it that bluntly, but the mess we're wading through now is from crap that started rolling downhill a couple of years ago.

Our problem is these three-months-long awkward interim phases on the way to wherever they're taking us are sucking all the fun out of combat.

Sorry, but no. The "previous guy" did not up DoTs through the roof one patch and then... [rantsnip]

Poster asked what's different now. That's what's different now. I have no explanation for why the current team has handled rolling out their changes the way they have, and I'm not enjoying it much. But of course they're going to make changes.

keto3000

Historical perspective on CLASS IDENTITY & CHARACTER BUILDING:

EARLY/MID 2014 (when the game still had Vet ranks (pre CP system) there was a a major discussion re CLASS IDENTITY/ARCHETYPES & debate regarding the overall direction of character building in ESO.

Class/archetype skill-based VS. "No class" character building defined solely by the player's choice of Weapon, Armor, Guild & World skills allowing players to build any character & define it by chosen skill lines and further refinement through a constellation based class refinement (I.e. a CP tree for "sorcerer"mage" specialization, etc)
(There was also mention of this by Nick Konckle in the first Reddit AMA as well.)

CHECK OUT THESE Throwback threads:

https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/115543/why-eso-should-not-have-classes-and-how-classes-ruin-the-game

https://tamrielfoundry.com/articles/class-system-is-a-good-thing/?page=5#comment-195487

Arciris

Greetings Developers,
Thank you for the communication, much appreciated.

Just a few things:

1. This is a 5+ years old game. Your article reads like a game in a development/ beta phase. More concerning than reassuring,

2 . The issue with Class Identity is not that Classes didn't have any but that they are loosing it, and the rate at which they are loosing their identity is increasing. 2014 Class Identity >>>>>> 2019 Class Identity.

3. All Classes are viable - even if not optimal- at all roles since 2014. Class viability at all roles in 2014 >>>> 2019 Class viability at all roles,

4. More classes were Optimal at different roles in 2014 than in 2019, as Optimal would depend more on group composition (PvE and PvP) and content design (PvE).
This is mostly because there were more Play-Patterns available for each role in 2014 (not limited to)
Examples:
Tank. We had at least 3 generic Play patterns available (+ sub patterns):
- Mitigation Tank : the only one that is still Optimal in all PvE content,
- Evasion Tank: still somewhat viable in vanilla content, but barely viable nonetheless anywhere else.
- Damage shield tank/magika tank: somewhat viable in vanilla content, not even viable anywhere else anymore.
Same could be said about Healers.

Conclusion:
Your article can be summed up as "Our goal is to have the Sun set in the West"
BUT in your actions you are somewhat even failing at that since 1) Class Identity is fading, 2) Class viability is getting more limited 3) less Play-Patterns available for both all roles and all classes.

A Combat team at this point should be focusing on 1) create and add NEW combat Play-Patterns, through additions of MORE skill lines (we need more weapon types) and interesting sets to support them- not rewriting/deleting existing Play-Patterns 2) Fix hindering long time plaguing combat bugs as well as fixing new ones in a timely manner.

Kind regards,
Arciris

Elsonso

Cadbury wrote: »

Edit: Make no mistake. I'm not exonerating the devs completely. I'm simply giving credit where credit is due.

I find it interesting how people, deliberately or otherwise, make qualifying comments like this that work to defend themselves from potential "White Knight" accusations. I will have to keep a look out here... My impression is that the people who openly hate what ZOS does very rarely do that to avoid being called out for biased hate.

Cadbury wrote: »

lordrichter wrote: »

SaltySudd wrote: »

So while the balance numbers are important and certainly have their place, ultimately what is going to draw in new players and retain veterans is to have a fun game that feels good that they enjoy to play. Class identity is absolutely crucial in achieving that.

Sadly, ZOS either did not have a firm class identity rule in place from the start, or they decided to toss it and create a new one. Multiple times. I have come to expect that ZOS is going to change the class identity whenever they feel they want to.

I still have a stamina DK on the bench from back when they decided to split DK into the cool fire breathing and the not-so-cool poison vomit.

In ZOS's defense, it is entirely possible that this topic could be a sign that the devs have finally decided to totally invest in a design philosophy regarding class identity and are wiling to be honest and frank about it going forward. I have to give the devs props for at least addressing the "viable" vs. "optimal" debate.

In the end, we have to be willing to meet each other halfway. Or the disconnects between dev and player will only get wider.

I view things this way... I am a spectator in their game, their world, and their decisions. I have no stake in the studio, or the game. I receive no financial benefit from it. I am merely a consumer. If dissatisfaction with any of that reaches the point where I am no longer able to have fun, then this is no longer a fun game to play. If this does not look to be temporary, I will move on.

There is no "half way" in my mind. I can provide feedback and suggestions, but I am under no mental fantasy that suggests that they have to meet me half way. Any part of the way, actually.

I want them to come up with skill, class, class identity, race, and racial identity standards and then, in the future, when someone at the studio suggests a cool new thing to do, they review that suggestion within the bounds of those standards. If it does not fit, I want them to toss it rather than remaking the standard so that it can fit. What they actually DO, well, that is their decision to make, and mine to decide if I agree.

The article that has been provided builds on previous statements that suggest that they have the creation of standards in mind, which I see as new territory for the studio. This journey started about a year ago, so we will see where it takes us. I am under no illusion that, as soon as they create their standards, they start changing them. Again, their decision. They usually fail to consult with me, first.

I have been here more than 5 years. I am not currently seeing any reason to leave the game. I am certainly not leaving over the combat changes in U24. I am viewing this as a largely positive move by the studio. It is a reduction, and could use some tuning, but still largely positive in the sense that they are finally aligning things to standards. We will see next week what direction they go with the tuning.

Edit:

Arciris wrote: »

Greetings Developers,
Thank you for the communication, much appreciated.

Just a few things:

1. This is a 5+ years old game. Your article reads like a game in a development/ beta phase. More concerning than reassuring,

Previous statements by the studio indicate that this is deliberate and how they want to run the game. They want to view the game as not being finished and being continually expanded and added to. I have always taken this to mean more than paid DLC content. I have taken this to mean the entire game, including the base game.